The Oakland Raiders' Case for the Spread Offense
This isn't your father's NFL. Heck, this isn't your older sibling's NFL. The NFL game has evolved so much recently with new rules, new types of athletes and new formations. We all know about our beloved Oakland Raiders' hardships and struggles since the beginning of the 2003 season all the way into the now, the year 2009. With all of the struggles that have gone on, I think it's time to undergo a dramatic makeover. Let me make the case for the Oakland Raiders to implement a spread offense. It's not 1970 anymore, it's not 1980, it's not 1990, it's not even 2000 nor is it 2005. It's 2009, so let's get with the time.
Let's start off with the basics. The spread offense, as pretty much all of us know, is basically a passing formation utilizing a shot gun. It allows you spread the field, hence "spread" in the title, and use your weapons in three-, four- and five-receiver sets. You can mix and match as you'd like, of course, with running backs and tight ends. Why would you use a spread offense, you ask? It works and the run game doesn't.
I'm looking at the 2009 rushing leaders by teams. The Tennessee Titans (5-6) are in first place, the New York Jets (5-6) are in second place, the Carolina Panthers (4-7) are in third place and the Miami Dolphins (5-6) are in fourth place. All four of those teams are under .500. This is not a running league anymore. The ball control style of football on the ground with a "game-managing" quarterback doesn't work anymore. Pound it all you want, but you better be able to throw the ball through the air.
Let's take a look not the passing leaders, but those teams in the bottom 11 in passing offense. The St. Louis Rams (1-10), San Francisco 49ers (5-6), Carolina Panthers (4-7), Kansas City Chiefs (3-8), Buffalo Bills (4-7), Tampa Bay Buccaneers (1-10), New York Jets (5-6), Miami Dolphins (5-6), Tennessee Titans (5-6), Cleveland Browns (1-10) and the Oakland Raiders (3-8) are your teams that rank inside the bottom 10 teams in passing offense. All 11 of those teams are under .500. If you want to win games in the NFL, throw the football. It's easier to throw the ball when you spread the field and teams that do have been successful in the NFL.
Let's now take a look at the passing leaders in the NFL this season. Once again, it's a group of 11 that stick out at me. The Indianapolis Colts (11-0), New England Patriots (7-3), Houston Texans (5-6), Pittsburgh Steelers (6-4), Green Bay Packers (7-4), Arizona Cardinals (7-4), New Orleans Saints (10-0), Philadelphia Eagles (7-4), Dallas Cowboys (8-3), Minnesota Vikings (10-1) and San Diego Chargers (7-4) are the top 11 passing teams in the league. I look at the teams that predominately either use a shot gun or at least have four weapons out there consistently. Those teams are the Colts, Patriots, Packers, Cardinals, Saints, Eagles and even the Cowboys. The Chargers use the shot gun often as well. These are the teams that are having success. They are putting the ball in the air. You're probably saying, "Hey, most of these teams don't use the true spread. They're dropping back and passing the ball." Well, if you're going to drop back and pass the ball, spread 'em out and utilize all of your weapons. The Saints and Patriots are the best examples of this, and even the Colts.
I think that after this season, our best bet is to go to a spread offense. "Well, Rated-R, you need the right personnel. You can't just do this on a whim, silly." Yes, this is true. You need the right kind of personnel. We do not yet have all the pieces needed. After shoring up the right side of the offensive line and possibly grabbing a wide receiver somehow, all we need is a quarterback. Potential free agent quarterbacks include Jason Campbell from Washington and Trent Edwards from Buffalo, and I'd even look into trading for Dennis Dixon from Pittsburgh. Drafting a quarterback is another option and there are quarterbacks who have run a spread offense in college. Tim Tebow from the University of Florida and Tony Pike from the University of Cincinnati stand out as quarterbacks who would be familiar with this system. I want to make the case for a running quarterback, though, while we're here. We can double up on our spread system. If we acquire a guy like Dennis Dixon or draft someone like Tim Tebow, we can incorporate the wildcat formation in with this spread offense. No one can deny that we don't already have the pieces in place for a wildcat formation. Darren McFadden, a talented player that was born to the formation, was the prototype for the formation at the University of Arkansas. He ran it very effectively with now Dallas Cowboys running back Felix Jones. McFadden was a passing threat as well as a rushing threat. The Miami Dolphins who are the masters of the wildcat formation have a quarterback by the name of Pat White, a former star at West Virginia University, and he's a passing threat in that formation. If we get our running threat in the spread offense, he can run the wildcat formation with McFadden.
Breaking away from that little wildcat moment there, let's go back to the personnel needed for a spread offense. Obviously, wide receivers are a must. Different types of wide receivers are a must. The Patriots have a deep threat with Randy Moss, a possession receiver in Wes Welker and two really good tight ends in Benjamin Watson and Chris Baker. With those four guys through the air with some other young talent, the Patriots have excelled in using the spread offense. We don't need to go team-by-team to look at the Saints or Colts. You can figure it out. For the Raiders, we have speed and size. Do we have guys that can catch? Well, the only guy I have a major problem with is that one rookie from the University Maryland by the name of Darrius Heyward-Bey. He has the speed, as does Johnnie Lee Higgins. Chaz Schilens can be the possession receiver and Louis Murphy can stretch the field with his size and speed. Zach Miller is one of the top tight ends in the AFC and our most reliable target. The Colts' most reliable target is Dallas Clark, another tight end. The afformentioned McFadden can work like a Reggie Bush, Kevin Faulk or Joseph Addai out of the backfield. We can mix in Michael Bush and Justin Fargas to occasionally carry the ball and even to be used in the wildcat formation along with our running threat of a quarterback and Darren McFadden.
No, I am not comparing the Raiders to the Saints, Colts or Patriots. No, I am not saying that we can be as successful as these teams are right now right away. What I am saying is that we need a change. So, let's change with the NFL. We don't have to challenge for the undefeated record or go to the Super Bowl right away. I think what we can do, though, is become a better football team with this new style of offense. The NFL is moving in a direction away from the smash mouth style of football that used to be played to win. Defensive backs can hardly put a finger on wide receivers these days, so let it rip or at least toss it around backyard-style. With the rule changes allowing the offenses to be more freer, let's use it to our advantage as clearly the more successful teams have. To me, the spread offense is worth a shot. It really is worth a shot.
57 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Aside from a personal dislike of the shotgun
the spread commits to the passing attack and diminishes the running attack. I prefer a more balanced offense that keeps all options available. The teams using the spread have extraordinary QBs, O-lines and targets. Defenses will find solutions to the high-octane air attack and these teams won’t be prepared to run the ball. “Strength in balance.”
Son-of-Blanda
Running Attack
I don’t think it would be diminished if we add the wildcat formation to our spread offense, which is something I pointed out in the post.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Nov 29, 2009 9:56 PM PST up reply actions
McFadden
I don’t want to trade him if we were to implement the wildcat. We’re not, though. The reason why I said we should look into trading McFadden is partially because he isn’t used right. We aren’t going to go with the wildcat or the spread offense. I just think we should.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Nov 30, 2009 3:03 PM PST up reply actions
Its not for us.
Look at Tennessee for example. They put in Vince, and won 5 straight while dominating the run. Now yes, Bruce is no Vince and All of RBs together dont have the talent of Chris Johsnon. But if we followed their steps, we could be maybe 4-7 right now.
Tennessee
That’s one team that is doing it this way, compared to multiple teams that spread it out.
Anyway, the wildcat is totally for us. Like I mentioned in the post, the guy whom the wildcat was designed for is on our team.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Nov 30, 2009 5:14 PM PST up reply actions
The Spread
That is what I was talking about, I know the Wildcat can work in Oakland, but Im not sure on the spread
Spread Offense
I think it can work, and it’ll work well with a dual threat quarterback. We need a few more pieces, yeah, but then I think it’s possible.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Dec 1, 2009 4:31 PM PST up reply actions
Spread = Shotgun
The spread is shotgun. Just because you change the name doesn’t make it a new innovation. Is that what you mean by “The NFL has changed so much.” lol!
I don’t know if Green or Campbell can help. Trent Green was benched a couple weeks ago, and Campbell hasn’t shown anything to prove he’s a franchise quarterback.
Pistol might work
The dive, off-tackle, and sweep runs are handicapped by any variation of the shotgun formation. On the other hand, a pistol formation with the wildcat might work by allowing more balance between run and pass while keep the deception factor – which shotguns lack.
Son-of-Blanda
by Sons-of-Blanda on Nov 30, 2009 12:40 AM PST up reply actions
Except Oakland can't run Wildcat for shit
It’s either 5 yards or tackle for a loss. Then again that’s just Darren McFadden for ya.
Evey- "Are you a crazy person?"
V- "I'm quite sure they'll say so."
V for Vendetta, blowing your mind away since 2005.
Darren McFadden
He can be a good player. Last week for example. I liked the way Tom used him in the Offense. I just wish he would off got maybe 15 more yard on the grnd with the same amount of carries. RRS, this is a very well written post, but the spread will not be effective in Oakland unless you wanna wait a decade for the talent to come around. I love the idea of the Balanced offense. It works incredibly well in Oakland when its in sync
No raw materials, know how, or personality for it
A long and uncertain project – too radical – like converting a Ford factory that’s been making F-150s for decades into a Ducati factory making Streetfighters.
Son-of-Blanda
by Sons-of-Blanda on Nov 30, 2009 9:09 AM PST up reply actions
McFadden is an okay player
And he won’t be better until he stop getting hurt and stay on his legs and push back instead of being tripped up by the defense just blowing on him. And that dropped ball cost us another TD. McFadden is better running up the sidelines where there are less Defenders than up the gut.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
I've been wanting this for a while now
I first thought of it when JaMarcus started struggling. Why not go to a mostly shotgun offense always utilizing at least three receivers, a single back and a tight end. JaMarcus knows how to work in the shotgun better than from under center and it would only require him to make one or two reads before taking off running (Laugh if you must, but while he’ll never be a Colt McCoy, I think his running is underutilized. He’s big and can run some people over.)
I think it’s important to distinguish between the t ypes of spreads. There’s the kind you’ll find at Texas Tech which is extremely pass happy and the kind you’ll find at Florida that involves a lot of QB draws and the like.
"'Tis a bird I love, with its brooding note, And the trembling throb in its mottled throat; There's a human look in its swelling breast, And the gentle curve of its lowly crest; And I often stop with the fear I feel-- He runs so close to the rapid wheel." Nathaniel Parker Willis, "The Belfrey Pigeon"
That would go against why they drafted DHB
If you recall Tom Cable’s reasoning for why the Raiders picked Darrius Heyward-Bey as the 1st WR in the draft he said it was because the other receivers came out of spread offenses in college and would take much longer to develop into NFL receivers. Not that he and the Raiders were right because DHB is a longterm reach of a project as an NFL caliber receiver, let alone a #1 receiver in this league. Which begs to question, “will the Raiders ever get it right again when calculating a 1st round draft pick?” But, the fact is, from his statement you can infer the Raiders will not become a spread offense anytime in the near future.
by Older_than_Moses_Shaq on Nov 30, 2009 10:53 AM PST reply actions
Spread Offense
But, the fact is, from his statement you can infer the Raiders will not become a spread offense anytime in the near future.
I’m not saying they will, I’m saying they should.
The Ultimate Opportunist
by Rated-R Superstar on Nov 30, 2009 3:02 PM PST up reply actions
rec'd R-rated...
I think we should indeed break away and change or else contue to get left behind.
It is time for change and Al knows this… (The Raiders are losing money and are selling 10% of the franchise to raise capital)
Al must be removed because he is the own pulling the trigger on the misfires and really start fresh with a good coach.
How about Bryan Billick (former Ravens coach)?
I think Heyward Bey will get better, but time is running out on McFadden and Russell is clearly a " BIG FAT/ DUMB/ WORTHLESS BUST"
How about Vick running your spread offense instead of Campbell or Trent Edwards????
are you sure?
Edwards is on the bench. Campbell sucks. Vick huh?
The most radical idea that might work – Tim Tebow anyone?
Astute observation and post, RRS, but no Trent Edwards please
Today’s successful teams pass to set up the run. It’s arguable we have a lot of the personnel. We need a couple of dominating stud o linemen, the receivers to start catching balls or get some guys who can, and spreading defenses and creating gaps where blockers can grade roads for the running backs.
It’s a trip how circular it all is, but almost all teams have already made this conversion; the one’s who have not, as you pointed out, are being left in the dust.
I wanted to say we can start spreading defenses. Excuse my laziness!
I like Billick too. Not sure if he’s enough a type A personality to have success in the Davis regime.
The Coryell Offense can achieve that while maintaining a balanced attack.
Keep the FB for screens, pocket protection, leading blocking for RBs, and short yardage blast work.
Son-of-Blanda
by Sons-of-Blanda on Nov 30, 2009 1:56 PM PST up reply actions
Fad Formations Overrated
Other teams are using variations of what John Madden and Don Coryell used – so Al was ahead of his time. Spreading the defense is nothing new. Madden and Bill Walsh got it from Coryell and Fouts went to the HOF.
Notwithstanding, without players who fit a particular offense and do the simple things well (just block, baby) no offensive setup will help.
We have raw material to keep using it: speedy WRs, backs w/hands, a quick QB, but we need help on the line and should be using Lawton more to support them.
Son-of-Blanda
Doesn't anyone realise
This is exaclty the reason Al always drafts the speedy players. He always liked the deep threat. That’s why the Raiders execute more pass than run plays. The spread may work, but you have to have a solid QB. Of all the teams you noted that are passing leaders , 5 of them have MVP QBs, and 3 more have taken thier teams to the SuperBowl or were conference champs. They are not ordinary QB’s and that shows why just changing an offensive formation is not the answer.
As for your comment about the Wildcat; yeah, I think every Raider fan in the WORLD knows that they would be MUCH improved if they tried it at least 2 or 3 times a game, but good old Al doesn’t like gimicks or trick plays, so you can pretty much count on this NOT happening. Still, I like your post, I just don’t think this is the simple answer.
I disagree on the Wildcat
Perhaps you have some stats that disprove this but when they have run the wildcat (i believe they ran the wildhog in the Cincy game) they haven’t been very succesful.
o-line
we need a better right side of the o-line for anything to work.
fyi: nfl official says "we like the deep ball"
I agree with you on every point. I would only add that I think everyone likes the deep ball, just not as much as Al Davis. On NFL.com, there is a weekly segment done by the some guy from the league’s office that handles the officials. He said they like the deep ball and that’s why pass interference calls are rewarded by placing the ball at the spot of the foul.
We need to keep Russell.
Even if it takes another three years to develop him, he’d be worth it.
We will lose more games, we will see balls dropped and passes blown, but that’s what these young guys will do.
All the while, we beef up those lines.
As far as using McFadden correctly, I see Bush and Russell blocking for him, and short to medium passes, but no Wildcat in his future.
Russell blocking? Why not
I would pay for a closer seat to see him play Center or Right Tackle – he might even contribute there.
Son-of-Blanda
by Sons-of-Blanda on Dec 1, 2009 7:48 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
?????
Even if it takes another three years to develop him, he’d be worth it.
What? He’s gone as far he can. He doesn’t want to even try. You can only develop a person to the point they are willing to go. He’s a bust clear and cut. It’s time to move on from the experiment and get something proven. I expect rookie WR’s to miss routes and maybe drop balls a little bit. It’s a hard adjustment to NFL level, but they are at least showing they care and trying.
Russell needs to go away. While we can unload him in the uncapped year and not take a big hit on cap.
I don’t know if Gradkowski is the answer either, but he’s far better than Russell. Russell’s had 3 years, 2 of them playing, and he’s gone BACKWARDS. How are you going to develop that? Drive your car half way to the market, then put it in reverse, how much closer to the market are you getting?
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
It takes time to develop in the NFL
And that rule is no less applicable to quarterbacks.
This season has been about dropped balls, busted routes, and an offensive line hurt and jigsawed together.
Sure, Russell overthrows, underthrows, gets sacked, and eats skittles, but he won’t be the same quarterback in another year and a half. Until then, we should take advantage of our losses by accumulating a better run stopping capability, and a deeper offensive line when injuries strike.
Just like Heyward Bey, Russell will be coming online late, but if he develops like he should, he’ll be a bitch to stop.
There is no proof
he won’t be the same QB. In fact the current evidence we have at this moment is that he is and will remain stagnant. In fact I think he makes the other players not care because of his ineptitude. You point all his negatives and still say we should develop him more. I don’t see any compelling reasons to buy into your argument. So you’re either delusional or a troll.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
Oh, he's got some
positives too.
For instance, you could say he was on target for 8 passes that his receivers dropped in the game that preceded his benching; three of which were game changing in their yardage.
We need to develop him instead of investing in some other new guy.
Russell will find his NFL legs, it’s just a matter of time.
Don't you think that
if he was showing any signs of dedicating himself through intensive film study, coming in early or leaving late (there is also a place for him to stay at the facility) etc that he would be starting? Seriously, if the guy is not willing to put in the extra effort, why would you play him? As I’ve said many times, he got paid and he’s just fine with that.
At this point, Cable is
about winning whatever games he can to preserve his job, and less about the big picture of the team.
That’s fine, but Russell needs to be seasoned for our run which will be coming in the next few years once the receivers and him get their timing down.
By then, we’ll hopefully have some key components of the run stop in place,
Trading a first round pick for Seymour was puzzling, espcially seeing as how we are rebuilding and could use another first round offensive lineman at about that time.
Yet, we could use him if we acquire McCoy or Suh, and that would go a long way to justify the move -if he stays.
In any event, Davis should reassure Cable that his job isn’t in jeopardy, which it shouldn’t be, and finish up with Russell and Gradkowski alternating games until the end.
All the noise about needing a GM is true, but if he’s not on board with Russell, at least for the next three to four years, he’s not the guy.
First off, there is much more to playing DT than stopping the run
DTs, along with DEs, pressure the QB and b/c we rarely blitz they are even more vital to our success than if we did or used a 3-4 set. Secondly, Seymour is a disappointment and should be discarded at the first convenient opportunity. Russell was and remains a gross faux pas, he too must be cast out into the darkness to wail and gnash his teeth, as it were. Cable should be fired at Al’s whim with coaching duties assumed by Al Davis himself or Willie Brown or some yet undetermined interim coach.
Son-of-Blanda
by Sons-of-Blanda on Dec 3, 2009 3:24 PM PST up reply actions
Indeed, rushing the passer is
very important. But we need run stoppers plain and simple.
A red rover red rover team of third graders could get 100+ yards on us.
The talent at DT in this upcoming draft is such that I wouldn’t be too worried about the capability of a 1st and 2nd round pick also being a threat to the QB.
Stop the run.
It's been too long with Russell
already.
From this article:
Some quarterbacks would have responded to the benching by saying to themselves, “Self, this is embarrassing! These people apparently don’t like the way I’ve been playing. I’d better see what I can do to improve and get back onto the field.”
If that was Cable’s hope, he has been disappointed. Asked recently if he has seen a change in Russell since his demotion, Cable said, “I don’t really see any change whatsoever. He’s working, doing what he’s asked to do. He’s preparing like normal.”
He doesn’t see any change. I appreciate that you don’t want Russell to be an exercise in futility, but eventually you have to come to terms with fact and let it go. Russell’s a bust and at this point it doesn’t look like he’ll ever be even decent. And we don’ t have 3 or 4 more year to develop him. And any coach that comes in if Cable is fired won’t want to start Russell either unless they’re forced too by Davis. And there in lies the problem. The best thing Davis could do is unload Russell in 2010 when it wouldn’t hurt us during the cap. And if we do keep him, we need to restructure his contract. Keep Gradkowski the rest of the year and maybe start him next year and draft a QB in round 3 that Gradkowski could mentor. However I don’t think he’s the answer either, but he’s way better than Russell will ever be.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
"Preparing like normal"
Hadn’t read that quote. UGH!!!!!!!! You’d think Russell would show some kind of fire for crying out loud! I’m with you and SOB, who had an awesome line, “he too must be cast out into the darkness to wail and gnash his teeth, as it were.” Now that’s funny stuff!
or have a mental break down like Vince Young
what is more scary, mental break down (young)
or
mental break (russell)
Vince Young was better coming into the league than Jamarcus Russell
Jamarcus doesn’t work hard and doesn’t seem to care a whole lot about improving so I seriously doubt he’ll have any kind of “mental breakdown.”
Vince Young is not proof
Vince Young is Vince Young, not Jamarcus Russell. Are you related to Al by the way? Just messin’ with ya.
lol!
Remember, I was ready to take a picket to Russell’s house. Maybe we could talk him into a game of catch.
I forgot about that!
You were the one talking about picketing Russell’s house? At this point I’m for anything that might inspire him to work harder. I like that you’re positive about the future but I lack your faith in some of our key people. Trust is earned and lost and frankly, Al has lost me for now. I hope that he proves me wrong.
If we are going to do that...
then bring back Chucky as HC, and Gannon as OC.
The next thing is obvious, a GM and I think Tont Dungy would be a good fit .
"May the wind be at our back, here comes the Silver and Black "
though I know that'll never happen, that's an awesome combination, especially if Rich and Jon handpicked their qb
many of the regulars on this site take offense when folks just throw out idealistic names like that, when there’s no chance in hell of them ever happening, much less any real indication that they might actually happen.
If you’re gonna reunite Gruden and Gannon, might as well throw in Bruce Allen too.
When Hell freezes over my friend.
That is the day when Tony Dungy comes to Oakland. Same goes for Cowher and Shannahan. Its annoying when every automatically thinks these succesful guys who retires at the top of their career(Cowher)would come to an absymal team in Oakland.
Why would Dungy not consider the Raiders?
He has a lot of respect for Al Davis, and his hiring of minoritys. If you Ever expect to get anything out of Russel, then Dungy’s experience would go along way.
"May the wind be at our back, here comes the Silver and Black "
I think Dungy
is relaxing and enjoying his time away from the sideline and being w/ his family.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
Brooks
The only time I took a break from the Raiders was when Aaron Brooks was signed. That was the worst evaluation of talent ever. They reduced Al Davis’ meds after that one.
The East Coast Hype inflates players
Scouts are lame who don’t see through their own eyes.
Son-of-Blanda
by Sons-of-Blanda on Dec 4, 2009 12:00 AM PST up reply actions

by 



















